Connect with us

Published

on

“There is no way that you are ever going to convince me that this is a good movie.” – My Glorious Spouse, 2020

Here we are, at the precipice of greatness. Finally.

Let me tell you a story. A love story.

Back in the old days of chunky rental boxes of VHS tapes, I remember first seeing the glistening box in the Horror section of Movie Mania. Back in those times, children, one would hitch up their horse and cart, traveling three miles in the snow, uphill, to rent a free horror movie every Monday night. And, after the arduous trek back, would blow the dust from the VCR player and jam that precious tape in to watch a hidden relic of the past. And it was worth it. It was damn well worth it.

One of those Mondays was very special for me and was the day I watched “Surf Nazis Must Die”. I fell in love – hard.  I don’t want to say it changed my life, but here I am reviewing movies and getting paid, so you tell me, pal.

Advertisement

When I first met Glorious Spouse as an awkward teenager, this was a movie I shared on one of our dates. When I met new friends, I shared this. When I met GS’s friends, I shared this. It was not only a beautiful piece of schlock I admired to be shared, but also a litmus test; an endurance and reactionary experiment for me to gauge them. Did they see what I saw??? Could they feel what I felt?

No. Obviously. You saw the quote and obviously it wasn’t a deal-breaker, but it became the anathema I earned, as in, “Yeah, but you also think ‘Surf Nazis’ is good (so your opinion of movies is questionable)”.

Yeah, I did think it was good.

And you know what…I friggin’ still do.

So, my friends, let me try to open your mind and bring you into the nightmarish world of loss, madness, and revenge. In honor of Black History Month and in memory of Gail Neely, who played one of my favorite protagonists in all film history, I present to you: the review and exploration of Surf Nazis Must Die.

Advertisement
Let’s discuss

The Plot:

In the near future, a devastating earthquakes leaves the California coastline in shambles. The beaches are controlled by gangs, one of them being surf-friendly Neo-Nazis under the regime of “Adolf”, the self-proclaimed “Führer of the new beach”. Using the calamity and chaos to his advantage, he gathers the other gangs with the message of join his order or die on the sand. 

During the same tragedy of the earthquake, widower Eleanor Washington has lost her only home. Her adult son helps her into her new residence, a senior home, where she finds it difficult to adapt. She’s seen as a trouble-maker and instigator – smoking, gambling and not being complacent in her new rigid and infantilizing atmosphere.

The two stories intertwine when Mama Washington’s son is viciously murdered by Adolf and his gang. After losing the only thing in her life, Mama begins her descent into anger, madness and revenge against those who took her son’s life. Let it be known that Surf Nazis must die!!!  

The Nazis:

from my notes page

Most of the narrative is focused on the Surf Nazis and their interactions. Even the first shot is that of a young child, punk hair and cheeks painted with swastikas, shouting back cadenced authoritarian rhetoric to a stoic “Adolf”, within a group of other young children. Some of the Nazis have original Reich monikers like Eva, Adolf’s bitch (her words, not mine), and Mengele (the Valley-speaking Q who creates surfboard switchblades and whatnot). However, others do not share in the Nazi heritage: Brutus (the sensitive fighter), Hook (Alex from A Clockwork Orange meets Captain Hook), and Smeg (oh, I’ll talk about him later).

And then we have Adolf. Who is….dramatic. Laughably and adorably so. So much drama in this one. Drama and dreams. Dreams of leading all of the gangs of the beach (kind of like the beginning of Warriors, but as a Nazi d–head).

The Nazis live on the beach and in abandoned buildings, struggling through their existence by extorting other gangs, stealing from “normal” people, and eliciting the help of the young and dumb (we’ll get to Smeg, don’t worry). They are not powerful, really. They are sad. They are taunted by the other gangs. They sustain themselves by killing and eating wild pigs (?). And just as often as they band together, they tear each other apart. They are vicious and damaged. They are fumbling in their pursuit of power, and aimless in their violence. They have no agency, engagement, or efficacy.

The Mama:

Yes! Yes! Yes!

Enter our protagonist.  And yes, it could be easy to point out that there are certain characteristics, maybe even certain stereotypes, that are part of the “Mama” Washington character. She is a strong Black woman – Bible-carrying but is also sassy and sharp-as-tacks. She smokes cigars and gambles with her new friends at the senior home, telling them that she’s going to bring life into “them bitches”. 

I admit, there are almost Madea-esque traits, but I would say whereas the usual Older Black Female character is sometimes a cruel, shrieking portrayal with a touch of bitterness, Gail Neely plays Mama with so much heart and warmth, it’s hard not to be endeared by her performance. There are some moments of audacity, but it’s never cruel; it’s at the core of the character. There are genuine moments of tenderness and vulnerability within her strength and conviction. Gail Neely brings such life and grit to this character. She is an unconventional hero and badass. Yes, this character was written by a white male, but I believe it was done so with endearment to the character and her role as victim and avenger. 

Advertisement

And this is evident by the juxtaposition of her core concepts and motivations from the Nazis. She is the anti-Adolf. She is older. She is woman. She is Black. She is a nurturer and mother. She has purpose. She has agency. She has engagement with those around her. And you bet your sweet toots that she has efficacy. Mama Washington has power in her own life, even when she is deemed powerless (**see chainsaw vs tree scene**). She is the very opposite of Adolf and the Nazis, and it’s utterly surprising find something so rounded and in-depth in something so…Troma, let’s say?

The 21st Century Schizoid Man

There are really good shots in here. Really. Very clever camera work, no joke. I wrote that down a few times in my most recent viewing.

However, the most memorable and recognizable shot from the film is the Schizoid Man. In this incredibly dramatic point, Mama comes in first contact with one of the Nazis as he’s describing the death of her son. She grabs him and slams his head against a graffiti-painted wall. But it’s not just graffiti:

This is actually King Crimson’s album cover for 21st Century Schizoid Man, which is also featured as a song of general chaos, war imagery, death, destruction, and the desensitization of the human spirit from those elements. It was most likely written in response to the Vietnam War.

However, in this powerful moment, the art of the album is appropriated and re-contextualized. We see the pale head of a Neo-Nazi pushed against the mouth of a Black man, silently screaming in anguish. We see the older Black hand of a victim pushing the young and naïve racist perpetrator into that scream, into that direct confrontation of his superficial ideology and his subservient actions. During which, she becomes numb to the violence (and faceless) she is subjected and now a part of.

Just beautiful…

I could probably write forever about that scene. I could write forever about most scenes that feature Mama Washington because the incredible job that Gail Neely does. Let’s everyone take the day off of work to discuss how incredible her performances are!

Er….except this one…

The Homework: Thick Brain Roll Juice

I read up some for this one. I did my homework. Originally, I actually was going to argue that they aren’t really Nazis, but counter-culture, living in a depraved environment with limited resources because they are bored, “too hip” and white.

While some of that may be true (youpieceofcrapSmeg), the homework I did proved me wrong. Terrifyingly wrong.

It’s easy to watch this film for the laughs, for the fun, for the tie dye beach gang, Adolf’s awkward line reads, the gobs of slow-mo surfing, and Gail Neely’s poetic performance.

Advertisement

But the fact is that it’s not just a fun vacuum of cinematography and over-the-top acting. Watching this, it’s easy to dismiss this as a campy romp. Like I said, I was originally going to talk about turf wars and lack of seething resentment because they didn’t really strike me as Nazis. Assholes, yes. Nazis, no.

In fact, the very first paragraph of An Ethnographer Looks at Neo-Nazi and Klan Groups The Racist Mind Revisited by Raphael S. Ezekiel speaks exactly to that point and to my casual dismissal,

Americans today often learn about Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan through television clips of rallies or marches by men uniformed in camouflage garb with swastika armbands or in robes. These images often carry commentary implying that the racist people are particularly dangerous because they are so different from the viewer, being consumed by irrationality. The racists and their leaders are driven by hatred… Raphael S. Ezekiel

The same can be said for the films that we watch, Surf Nazis Must Die included. How Hollywood portrays the Nazi (Neo- or otherwise) changes over time. Our limited scope of understanding changes with those waves of popular culture, whether one is the impact of the other.

In a paper by Geoffrey Cocks entitled Hollywood Über Allies: Seeing the Nazi in American Movies, Cocks describes the road to Surf Nazis and beyond in the public cinematic sphere:

By the late 1960s, a skeptical, critical, and even cynical consciousness about the contemporary world had entered even Hollywood. Newly empowered teenage consumers and the Vietnam draft made the American film Nazi-unlike 1940s war films-big antiwar box office material because the Nazi now stood for any totalitarian oppression for young radicals outraged by American racism and the war in Vietnam. Bank of America became Bank of Amerika, and police became “fascist pigs.”

The 1970s in America brought a wave of still more problematic interest in Hitler, the Nazis, and the Holocaust, in which a mix of agnosticism, cynicism, hedonism, and nihilism prevailed over 1960s iconoclasm and idealism. The Nazi became a “floating signifier” for trivial fanaticism or madness: a “lawn Nazi,” a “feminazi,” a film demanding that Surf Nazis Must Die (Peter George, 1987)

From the 1980s on, ever more of international cinema hewed to the Flollywood-style entertainment movie. With the exception of a few films about American neo-Nazis, the Nazi and the German became less topical and central, even those about the war, and so tended to serve only the blandly realistic or the distantly metaphorical. But the Nazi yet retains his cinematic potency. 

The weakness in Tarantino’s postmodern play is the weakness that had been growing and maturing in film ever since the Second World War: cinema grows so self-referential, so caught up in the economic conversation between Hollywood and American culture, that it ceases to be critically reflective. Cocks, Geoffrey. “Hollywood Über Alles: Seeing the Nazi in American Movies.” Film & History: An Interdisciplinary Journal, vol. 45 no. 1, 2015, p. 38-53. Project MUSE muse.jhu.edu/article/589137.

So, let’s dumpster-dive into the history a little to separate fiction and fact, or maybe even find some similarities. Before the 80’s, when this movie was filmed, the KKK was the anchor for much of the white power movement and didn’t mix with the emerging Nazi party in the US. But then the 80’s came with its Flashdances, Reaganomics, and Rubicks Cubes, and the two more or less started to merge into a smelly shitstain of grossness, and “concepts/symbols started being used indiscriminately between the groups“. (Ezekiel, pg. 52)

Advertisement
Do people still get this reference?

This happened partly because “some separatists feel that the old Klan is a ‘dinosaur,’ not aggressive and technical enough in its approach of asserting dominance and power. This view has led to the formation of other divisions of hate groups.” (Anderson, James F., Laronistine Dyson, and Willie Brooks Jr. “Preventing hate crime and profiling hate crime offenders.” Western Journal of Black Studies 26.3 (2002): 140) By 1994, (four years before Surf Nazi’s first DVD release) different watchdog groups estimated hard-core militant membership around 23,000 to 25,000, with approximately 150,000 sympathizers who subscribed to the ‘zines, and another 450,000 people who read the issues for the articles but didn’t buy. (Ezekiel, pg. 52-53)

During that time, between 1955 and 1998, white racists were responsible for more than a third of deaths related to domestic terrorism between, excluding the 168 individuals killed in the Oklahoma City bombing (Parkin, William S., et al. “Ideological Victimization: Homicides Perpetrated by Far-Right Extremists.” Homicide Studies, vol. 19, no. 3, Aug. 2015, pp. 211–236, doi:10.1177/1088767914529952.). And people of color are more often. Just in 1997, of the hate crimes committed, 8,049 bias-motivated criminal incidents were reported. Of these incidents, 4,710 were motivated by racial bias (Anderson).

But…but surfing! And….fun! And….switchblade surfboards! They just silly-billy Nazis! 

Just a silly billy dude…

Sure, let’s talk about the group – it’s dynamics and how it operates.

As previously mentioned, the first shot of the movie is at youth gathering with Adolf, establishing the supremacy of the Surf Nazis as the masters of the beaches. In fact, that the beach is in a bitter and bloody turf war, mostly because of the Nazis, which isn’t that surprising: “The movement makes its claim, in the ideology, to a turf and declares its role as defending that turf.” “…an ideology that glorifies toughness and fears tenderness or nurturance as weakness.” (Ezekiel) And we’ll circle back to the high tension created by them, too, so put a pin in that.

Let’s first talk about the one who pulls it all together. Even with his campy flair for the dramatic, Adolf still manages to manipulate and lead his group and terrorize the other gangs. This is well-put by Ezekiel in a few different sections:

The power to attract members comes from the leader’s certainty and his capacity with words and body to be the living expression of the resentment and anger of the listeners. Moreover, he can make his listeners feel that they are part of something that is happening, that these are not empty words.

In most cases, the leader is not extremely racist. Racism is comfortable for him, but not his passion. At core, he is a political organizer. His motive is power. Racism is his tool. He feels most alive when he senses himself influencing men, affecting them.

His disrespect includes his followers. He respects only those, friend or foe, who have power. His followers are people to be manipulated, not to be led to better self-knowledge.

We see this demonstrated in different ways, like the way he treats Eva, the way he beats Mengele, and his general indifference to the others. He is aloof, but intense, drawing on each group’s fears and insecurities…via drama!

Advertisement
So dramatic!!!

Now let’s talk about “Smeg”.

I said I’d get to you…

He’s also a piece of shit who comes from a loving, providing, un-apocalyptic home. His mom even tucks him in at night as he whines that he can’t go and play with Adolf and the rest. This is where you realize that civilization hasn’t crumbled. People still live in nice middle-class homes. People still go to work. People watch TV. People drink New Coke. People are existing and thriving, not living in the beach slums, eating wild (?) pigs. And to do so is by choice.

The apocalyptic backdrop is a facade as a means to an end. The disruption of the earthquake actually means very little, as any situation real or imagined, will have the message of apocalypse, as it is a means for Adolf to control and manage the group to do his bidding: 

Any measure is justifiable in this war for survival. If innocent people die, it is unfortunate but a given in a war of survival. All this is heard repeatedly in leadership presentations, and its apocalyptic energy animates the larger movement gatherings. EZEKIEL, RAPHAEL S. “An Ethnographer Looks at Neo-Nazi and Klan Groups: The Racist Mind Revisited.” American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 46, no. 1, Sept. 2002, pp. 51–71, doi:10.1177/0002764202046001005.

American Nazism’s historic preoccupation with society’s decay and racial erosion demonstrates its anticipation of the arrival of a catastrophic new millennium.Brad Whitsel (2001) Ideological Mutation and Millennial Belief in the American Neo-Nazi Movement, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 24:2, 89-106, DOI: 10.1080/10576100117722

It’s not that the world is in chaos, the Nazi perceive and perpetuate the idea that the world is in chaos to justify their actions – whether its eating a wild pig (?), stealing a purse, or killing a Black man…

Let’s talk about Leroy’s Death (played by Robert Harden).

One study was particularly heartbreaking as it pieced a very tight puzzle to Leroy’s death in the movie to actual homicide victims of Neo-Nazis. Trigger warning; it’s really, really sad.

Victim–offender relationships show that 72.6% of victims had no prior knowledge of their killer(s)

99% [of racially targeted people] (or 59.2% of all victims) were killed because of something they represented, whether a specific race, religion, or even government. Here, the offender had no knowledge of the victim or their personal actions, only that they represented the population the offender was targeting.

Anti-race/ethnic minority victims were also killed more often by a knife, blunt object, or bodily weapon when compared with the anti-abortion and anti-government victims.

…almost 30% of anti-racial/ethnic minority victims were killed while walking or driving on the street.

These victims [racially motivated] had the most violent deaths. Often excessive force was used to beat them to death with blunt objects and bodily weapons. Mutilation and overkill were not uncommon.

The variance in overkill and modus operandi also could be a by product of a subculture of violence, such as those held by neo-Nazis and skinheads. Parkin, William S., et al. “Ideological Victimization: Homicides Perpetrated by Far-Right Extremists.” Homicide Studies, vol. 19, no. 3, Aug. 2015, pp. 211–236, doi:10.1177/1088767914529952.

So….now what?

This is a very real reality that is still happening to this day, especially as the growth of hate groups and crimes have increased dramatically over the US, and even more, that they are changing. They may not be huge groups, but they are influential groups and they evolve. As two researchers put it:

Advertisement

Social movements in the cultic milieu are by no means stable, nor do their beliefs or organizational patterns remain constant.Rather, groups in this constellation tend to be ephemeral and are governed by a lifecycle process. Over time, these collectivities ultimately fractionate and, in doing so, give birth to new groups. The process is cyclical and facilitates the recycling of ideas (and groups). This continual process of cult birth, reformation, and death suggests that the cultic milieu is a permanent part of society, while the individual cult is a transitory phenomenon. Brad Whitsel (2001) Ideological Mutation and Millennial Belief in the American Neo-Nazi Movement, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 24:2, 89-106, DOI: 10.1080/10576100117722

Low activity is not equivalent to no activity, particularly when white supremacist activity spikes in response to major social change like the election of the country’s first black president. Cooter, A. (2011), Neo‐Nazi Nationalism. Stud Ethn Nation, 11: 365-383. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9469.2011.01126.x

As fun and campy as this movie is, it is based on fact and fantasy. Unfortunately, in real life, Mamas don’t get to but guns that “take a head off a honkey in twenty paces” and exact revenge. They exist in a culture that created the killer and perpetuates racism (whether loud or quiet) via complacency and institutionalized undertones. And do so, in our norms and conventions, silently.

(Ahem)

And it’s easy to be complacent and to not understand the institutional affect when you’re far-removed. It’s a understandable reaction to watch this movie and not identify with any of the Nazis because they are so extreme. They cannot be us. We don’t kill people. We don’t paint swastikas on our surfboards.

For example, my board has Knight Rider era ‘Hoff

But…I just want to have fun and watch my movie 🙁 

Of course watch this movie and have fun! Watch the hell out of it – I love it! Remember, this is a love story. Enjoy the camp, enjoy the revenge and goofy surfing. It’s there for you to enjoy and love as your own.

But it’s also a great moment to contemplate, to take a step back and think, especially for us honkeys (we honkeys?). Some great advice for this can, of course, be found in multiple sources, but taking from Ezekiel’s final thoughts on the matter in his paper on Neo-Nazism in America:

Probably the greatest effect of White racism today is its capacity to slow institutional change. Policies that help institutional racism to continue to flourish do much more to hurt minority people than do hate crimes.

And it is worth noting that the neo-Nazis are not totally alien to White Americans. A social attitude does not exist in the mind as an isolated single entity. Real attitudes, or orientations, are laid down throughout life in layer after layer.

The task is to get acquainted with those layers of oneself—to learn to recognize them and not be frightened by them. It is not a disgrace to have absorbed some racism. It is a disgrace not to know it and to let those parts of ourselves go unchecked.

It’s easy not to have a switchblade swastika board, but it’s becomes convoluted if you defend saying the n word, or roll your eyes at #whiteoscars. Its the latter that fuels the former and is the foundation on which its built. 

The Bottom-line:

Oh…you’re still here? That’s surprising.  5 out of 5 stars (5 / 5)

Don’t judge me.

Advertisement

When not ravaging through the wilds of Detroit with Jellybeans the Cat, J.M. Brannyk (a.k.a. Boxhuman) reviews mostly supernatural and slasher films from the 70's-90's and is dubiously HauntedMTL's Voice of Reason. Aside from writing, Brannyk dips into the podcasts, and is the composer of many of HauntedMTL's podcast themes.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
3 Comments

3 Comments

  1. John Combo

    February 29, 2020 at 12:54 pm

    Even the trailer is awesome! They actually put this in line with The Road Warrior and The Terminator! I’m not even sure if they weren’t trying to be serious! Awesome review!

  2. Patricia Dartt

    March 1, 2020 at 2:56 pm

    Awesome review. Actual thought on the movie not just glossed over fun or not fun. Not just talk about the visual aspects or acting. I like that you really researched here. You also mentioned the typical acting and cinematography and fun factors anyone would expect. Good job.

  3. Pingback: When Films Go Too Far I Can Help - Haunted MTL

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movies n TV

The Last Drive-In Live: A Tribute to Roger Corman

Published

on

By

The Last Drive-In with Joe Bob Briggs returned March 15th for a special tribute to Roger Corman. Filmed live in Las Vegas during Joe Bob’s Jamboree last October, fans who were unable to attend can finally see what they missed. The Drive-In is available on AMC+ and Shudder.

This week on The Last Drive-In, Joe Bob and Darcy return to pay tribute to Roger Corman’s first 70 years in Hollywood. Roger and Julie Corman join the hosts between films at the West Wind Drive-In for an incredible interview on stage. Legendary actor Bruce Dern is also part of the conversation. Spanning the decades, Joe Bob presents Corman’s A Bucket of Blood (1959) and Deathstalker (1983).

Live from Las Vegas

A Tribute to Roger Corman begins with a live rendition of the show’s theme song in front of the cheering audience. The stage brings the trailer park to Vegas with its familiar set-up of chairs and a cooler. John Brennan croons as Yuki Nakamura beats a colander with a stick before introducing the show’s hosts. Joe Bob gives a special shout-out to the Las Vegas Chamber of Cannabis before introducing Darcy the Mailgirl.

In place of a tangentially related rant, Joe Bob opens with focused praise of Corman. He lauds Corman’s ability to fully meld the business and art halves of producing. Bringing attention to how “cheap” Corman is, Joe Bob highlights the smart decisions that sustained Corman’s long career. He calls them “the decisions of a producer who is being an artist.” Corman’s ability to spot talent and negotiate deals connects him to the beating heart of Hollywood, and leaves Joe Bob “truly in awe” of him.

Beatnik City

Part of what makes Corman special is his fascination with new and culturally relevant ideas. A Bucket of Blood (1959), is perhaps the best example of his ability to take real life and turn it into art. Corman together with writer Charles B. Griffith spent time in beatnik coffeehouses to create what Joe Bob calls “the ultimate parody of the whole beat generation.”

Advertisement
A poster for Roger Corman's A Bucket of Blood.
A poster for Roger Corman’s A Bucket of Blood

Bucket tells the story of Walter Paisley (Dick Miller), an impressionable busboy who is determined to impress the customers he serves. Jealous of the attention poet Maxwell H. Brock (Julian Burton) commands; Walter decides to become a sculptor. While attempting to sculpt the face of the coffeehouse’s hostess Carla (Barboura Morris), Walter inadvertently kills his pet cat. Seizing the opportunity, he covers the cat in clay and passes it off as original work. When the sculpture gives him a taste of the adoration he seeks, Walter continues down the dark path of melding murder with art.

The Drive-In Totals include but are not limited to: 4 dead bodies, 1 dead-cat sculpture, attempted busboy seduction with heroin, skillet fu, and gratuitous beatnik poetry. “Four stars. Joe Bob says, ‘Check it out.’”

Decisions, Decisions

Despite the film only being 67 minutes long, Joe Bob emphasizes how its length in no way limits the complete and complex story. Corman cuts down film times as a production decision. According to Corman, 78 minutes is the perfect length for a movie because it lowers distribution costs. Low run-times also make movies more likely to receive a television sale as it allows for more commercials.

Joe Bob credits Bucket with defining the acting style of Dick Miller and kicking off his career of playing oddball characters. The film also shows the strengths of Julian Burton as a character actor. Corman expected those in his films to continue in the industry, but not necessarily with him. Speaking about a conversation he had with Corman once, Joe Bob recounts him saying, “If you make a third movie for me, I tend to lose all respect for you.”

Budgeting

Bemoaning that a producer like Corman doesn’t exist for the modern age, Joe Bob asks the audience who they think could be analogous. Eric Butts gleefully shouts out “Lloyd Kaufman!” Darcy agrees with Butts, but Joe Bob doesn’t seem to think one truly exists. If one does, I agree that Kaufman is the closest thing. Joe Bob seems to think Blumhouse might be it, but concedes “they make expensive movies now.” Corman was not one to make expensive films even if it was within the budget.

Utilizing cost-saving measures, Little Shop of Horrors (1960) was filmed shortly after Bucket and utilized the same sets. Little Shop is the only Corman film in the National Film Registry. Joe Bob seems perplexed by this as Bucket and Little Shop are “identically structured movies.” Between the two, he believes Bucket to be the superior film.

Advertisement

When Darcy asks Joe Bob what he would do with $10 million in production funding, he says he would make 40 movies. Bucket of Blood 2, Gatorbait 3, and Hogzilla 2 are all thrown out as options. As soon as hogzilla is mentioned, the crowd bursts out in the now-familiar “Hogzilla! Hogzilla! Hogzilla!” chant. Being there, it felt good to be able to join in on the chant live instead of yelling it at my screen.

My rating for Bucket of Blood: 4.7 out of 5 stars (4.7 / 5)

Crowd Pleaser

Due to the live format, there is no mail break between movies. Instead, Joe Bob announces that Darcy will be going through the crowd to collect their letters. This appears to be news to Darcy and she responds with a startled look on her face, “Oh, I will not be moving amongst them!” She may have become more confident with her place on The Last Drive-In, but sending her out into the dark among the masses is too far. We’ll try to not take it personally, Darcy.

Joe Bob sits on stage next to Darcy the Mailgirl
Joe Bob attempts to convince Darcy

Instead of leaving the stage, she asks Joe Bob if he has his questions ready for Corman. She braces again when he replies that he is going for spontaneity tonight. Joe Bob says he’s already asked all of his questions in previous Corman interviews, so he’s left with no choice but to wing it. “Whenever you say something off the top of your head, you make everyone mad, and I defend you,” she reminds him. 

Welcome to the Stage

A sense of joy and reverence overtakes the stage as Roger and Julie Corman join the hosts. It is easy to tell from Joe Bob’s face how much love and reverence he holds for Corman. Their relationship/friendship has lasted since Joe Bob presented Corman with a lifetime achievement award 40 years ago. Of course, the award was inscribed on a Chevy hubcap. And of course, it’s presentation took place at a drive-in theater.

Joe Bob Briggs interviews Roger Corman on stage.
Joe Bob interviewing Roger Corman

Noting that a Chevy hubcap just wouldn’t cut it this time, Joe Bob gives both Roger and Julie lifetime achievement awards inscribed on Cadillac hubcaps. When Darcy hands Corman his award, he smiles in delight. “That’s great, that’s great! I love it!” The synchronicity of the moment is a beautiful thing to behold.

Always Prepared

Although Joe Bob told Darcy he did not have questions planned, he dives into the interview. “You were the man who brought Ingmar Bergman to the drive-in,” he starts. Corman reveals part of his distribution strategy and notes that drive-ins typically suffer in the fall from a lack of pictures. He says they decided to put Bergman’s film Cries and Whispers (1972) into drive-ins and see what happened. “We were delighted to find we had done average business.”

Advertisement

Corman is just as endearing and affable throughout the remainder of the interview. As Joe Bob delves into his genre-spanning career, Corman’s answers are a wealth of institutional knowledge and personal stories. This is an interview that anyone and everyone planning on going into film should watch. Going through the multiple genres reveals how much of a finger Corman kept on the pulse of culture as well as his chameleon-like ability to fit himself into any situation.

What a Trip

Genres he has worked in include (but are not limited to): westerns, redneck action, film-noir, rock-and-roll musicals, historical action, ripped from the headlines exploitation, gangster, comedy, pure action, costume drama, women in prison, sword and sorcery, and motorcycle movies. Corman reveals he holds an affinity for the science-fiction genre in particular. “[It] is laid in fantastic areas, but to a large extent, it can be a comment on the present day.” Julie chimes in to reveal the first story Corman ever wrote was a science-fiction piece, and Corman looks wistful as he remembers failing to sell it.

When asked about his art-film period, Corman talks about dropping acid with the cast of The Trip (1967). Intending to draw from the experience while filming, Corman says the experience didn’t go entirely to plan. “I had such a great trip.” He remembers worrying it was “going to end up as an ad for LSD.”

Surprise Guest

Unbeknownst to everyone in the audience, Joe Bob arranged for a member of The Trip’s cast as a surprise guest. Bruce Dern enters the stage clad in a leather jacket. I’m not sure if this is his normal garb, or if he is making a nod to another Corman film he starred in – The Wild Angels (1966).

Dern is bursting with praise for Corman and his impact on the film industry. When Joe Bob asks about working with Jack Nicholson, Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper, Dern asserts “We went to the University of Corman.” I immediately wish I could buy merch emblazoned with that. He summarizes Corman’s career succinctly, “You do shit that’s never been done.”

Advertisement

Dern acknowledges that the pay wasn’t always fantastic, but that Corman always made sure his stars received the proper billing. “He put our names above the title.” Dern recalls being offended on Corman’s behalf for the lack of proper recognition throughout the years. “It was always fun to be with him and be able to say this kind of stuff about a guy, who God damnit deserves it.”

Lifetime Achievement

The interview ends with three incredible moments. First, Corman recalls receiving a death threat from Big Otto Friedli (a former President of the Hells Angels). Friedli was suing Corman in regards to The Wild Angels. His response to the threat leaves the audience in laughter. “My advice to you is forget the momentary pleasure of killing me and go for the million dollars.”

Next, the audience learns from Corman that a remake of Little Shop is coming in conjunction with Brad Krevoy. Joe Dante is directing the film, which is called The Little Shop of Halloween Horrors.

To end, Corman reveals that not only does he still have his original Chevy hubcap given to him 40 years ago, but that he brought it with him. In an incredibly touching moment, Corman bestows the award back to Joe Bob. “It’s my pleasure to give you the lifetime achievement award.” I cannot think of a higher honor.

You’ve Been Warned

Content warning: The second film of the night contains multiple depictions of sexual violence. Consequently, Joe Bob refers to it within his discussions of the film.

Advertisement

Despite there being literally hundreds of Corman films to choose from, Joe Bob selects Deathstalker (1983) as the second movie. He breaks his decision down to three factors. First, he wants to present a sword and sorcery movie. Second, he wants to highlight Corman’s use of foreign countries to “make movies that otherwise would not be made.” Third, the movie has a lot of naked women in it and is “loincloth city.”

A poster for Roger Corman's Deathstalker.
A poster for Roger Corman’s Deathstalker

Deathstalker tells the story of, well, Deathstalker (Rick Hill) and his quest to acquire three magical items in order to defeat the evil sorcerer Munkar (Bernard Erhard). As Joe Bob puts it, “There’s rape and there’s pillage and there’s magic swords and there’s castles and there’s peasant hoards…”

The drive-in totals include but are not limited to: 30 breasts, 24 buttocks, limb ripping, spears through the gizzards, heads roll, leprosy fu. “Four stars. Joe Bob says, ‘Check it out!’”

Parental Advisory

This film has an almost absurd amount of sexual violence in it. It is rare for a woman to be on screen without there being sexual violence. If you are uncomfortable with watching that take place, Joe Bob does an accurate summation at each break. If you don’t want to hear about it, skip the second film entirely. As Darcy says, “This movie is very rapey.” 

Thankfully, Joe Bob does also delve more into Corman’s history during the breaks. Corman struck a 10-picture deal with Héctor Olivera and Aries Films based out of Buenos Aires. Joe Bob credits this deal with saving Aries Film during a time of hyperinflation in Argentina. Apparently, The Argentine film industry wasn’t a fan of Deathstalker and criticized the exploitation inherent in its production.

The stunt-work in the film is impressive. While the stunts are fun to watch, it’s hard to forget that the performers were risking bodily harm at a pay-rate that was only acceptable because of Argentina’s economic situation. Joe Bob highlights the work of José Luis Arévalo as the character Pig-Face specifically as deserving praise and recognition.

Advertisement

A New World Order

Moving away from the film, Joe Bob goes deeper into Corman’s film distribution history. Starting with New World Pictures in 1970, Corman went on to create and sell various distribution companies. In the process, he created numerous sub-genres and launched the careers of several successful filmmakers. Martin Scorsese and Ron Howard are included in the list.

Corman would not allow someone to direct a film for him until they had editing experience. According to Joe Bob, Corman believes “editing is the key to great movies.” This calls back to his idea that 78 minutes is the perfect length for a movie. 

Lack of Defense

The film performed well in America but was a dud in its production home of Argentina. Joe Bob notes early into the film, “I am, by the way, one of the few defenders of this movie.” Darcy agrees that she is also a defender of the film. I am not.

My rating for Deathstalker: 1.3 out of 5 stars (1.3 / 5)

Wrap it Up

Although Darcy never waded into the crowd to collect letters, fans still wrote on whatever scraps they had and threw them in the collection box. Darcy chooses four letters, but my favorite comes from Victoria from Virgina. She writes in with a topical blonde joke: “Why did the two blonds freeze to death at the drive-in? They went to see ‘closed for the winter.’”

The night can’t really end until Joe Bob tells his jokes, and that he does. As the night draws to a close, John Brennan and the Bigfeet come back out with Yuki to sing the mutant oath as a send-off. Appropriately, the night ends with the crowd lovingly chanting Joe Bob’s name.

Advertisement

While I may not be a fan of Deathstalker, the special overall was incredible to experience. Sitting live in the audience (and catching glimpses of myself on TV) is something I will never be able to forget.

It’s fascinating to see how the live experience translated to the screen, but production did a fantastic job making it seamless. The energy of the crowd is really what makes this special. Chanting will never be the same again.

Darcy on stage chanting "loincloth!"
Loincloth! Loincloth!

My rating for A Tribute to Roger Corman: 4 out of 5 stars (4 / 5)

Continue Reading

Movies n TV

Unraveling the Artistry in Sean Mathias’s Hamlet Film with Ian McKellen

Published

on

2b v ~ 2b

Imagine Sir Ian McKellen, an icon of the stage and screen, diving back into the turbulent waters of Shakespeare’s Hamlet. This isn’t just any adaptation; we’re talking about a cinematic spin on Sean Mathias’s groundbreaking 2021 production, where age is just a number, and McKellen’s Hamlet shatters expectations. This Hamlet film is a feast for the senses and a triumph of storytelling.

Now, I’m not just whistling Dixie here; as someone deeply entrenched in Shakespeare’s rich tapestry and perpetually on the edge of my seat for fresh adaptations, the buzz around this particular version of Hamlet has me all kinds of excited. With IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes ready to chart its journey, and echoes of David Tennant to Helena Bonham Carter reminding us of Hamlet’s storied cinematic past, Sir Ian’s version is primed to stand tall amidst the ghosts of Kenneth Branagh and the tragic echoes of Ophelia. This film isn’t just a recount of Denmark’s doomed prince; it’s a beacon for Shakespeare enthusiasts and cinema buffs alike.

Overview of the Film

Diving headfirst into the heart of this cinematic marvel, “Hamlet” with Ian McKellen at the helm, is like stepping into a Shakespearean whirlwind spun into the modern age. Directed by the visionary Sean Mathias, this film plants its roots in the historic Theatre Royal Windsor, UK, transforming every corner of this iconic space into the brooding world of Elsinore. The cast, oh, the cast! It’s a lineup that reads like a who’s who of the acting world – from Jonathan Hyde’s (Claudius) gravitas to Jenny Seagrove’s (Gertrude) elegance, and let’s not forget the powerhouse that is Alis Wyn Davies (Ophelia). This ensemble, including Ben Allen (Horatio), Ashley D Gayle (basically everyone not named already) and Emmanuella Cole (Laertes), navigates Shakespeare’s complex language with a finesse that’s downright enviable.

Advertisement

This isn’t just any adaptation; we’re talking about a cinematic spin on Sean Mathias’s groundbreaking 2021 production, where age is just a number. McKellen’s Hamlet shatters expectations. Jim Phoenix

Picture, if you will: the world’s been hit with the stillness of the 2020 COVID-19 shutdown, and amidst this, “Hamlet” emerges as a beacon of artistic resilience. It’s not just any adaptation; it’s a modern-dress treatment that speaks to the here and now, pared down to a gripping two hours. The production breathes life into the Theatre Royal Windsor, turning its abandoned nooks and crannies into the very heart of Elsinore. From the safety curtain to the theatre foyer, every scene unfolds with an intimacy that only enhances the drama.

This film isn’t just about showcasing stellar performances; it’s an exploration, a conversation between cinema and theatre. How does one enhance the other? Can the grandeur of theatre translate onto the silver screen? With Neil Oseman’s ingenious cinematography, every frame of this film attempts to answer these questions, offering viewers a Hamlet that’s both familiar and startlingly new. Set your tvs on stun as this version hits shelves and electrons on April 8 coming out on DVD, Blu-ray, and Digital Download, this film is a testament to the timeless allure of Shakespeare, reimagined for a world in pause.

Ian McKellen dressed in a white fencing outfit with the title Hamlet

Ian McKellen’s Performance

Let me tell you, seeing Sir Ian McKellen take on Hamlet again, especially at 84, is like watching a master painter revisit his masterpiece with new colors. This isn’t just any performance; it’s a nuanced, age-blind portrayal that flips the script on traditional casting, making it a must-see for anyone who’s even remotely intrigued by Shakespeare’s work.

  • Age-Blind Brilliance: Let’s face it. Even my first thought was ‘how the hell is McKellen going to play Hamlet at 80??!’ Well, the answer is…brilliantly. McKellen’s casting in an age-blind production adds layers to Hamlet’s character, showcasing a blend of youthful energy with the wisdom of age. This duality brings a fresh perspective to the role, making it relatable across generations.
  • A Masterclass in Delivery: His performance is a quiet storm. It’s meditative, focusing on the weight of Hamlet’s words rather than overt dramatics. McKellen’s command of the language, his ability to find new inflections in well-trodden speeches, is nothing short of a masterclass. Shakespeare aficionados will be hanging on every word, reveling in the masterful delivery of the bard’s intricate verse. For those struggling with the text of the play, this might be the most friendly adaptation to sink your teeth into. McKellen’s delivery hits all the high notes, but his wisdom in holding back where others might push helps newer audiences connect with the material.
  • Physicality and Emotional Depth: Despite the quieter, more reflective approach, McKellen’s physicality and emotional depth do not wane. His portrayal is a testament to his skill, bringing a compelling prince to life who is both vulnerable and unpredictable. The scenes with the players, in particular, highlight his calculated madness, offering a glimpse into the prince’s tormented psyche.

Incorporating these elements into his portrayal, McKellen not only honors his past performances but also elevates this Hamlet film to new heights. It’s a celebration of Shakespeare’s timeless language and the psychological complexity of its characters, delivered by a cast led by a titan of the stage and screen.

Supporting Cast and Their Contributions

Alright, diving into the world of Elsinore beyond McKellen’s Hamlet, let’s talk about the squad that brings this Shakespearean drama to life. It’s like assembling a dream team where each player has their unique flair, but instead of dribbling basketballs, they’re slaying lines in iambic pentameter.

McKellen’s Hamlet is a feast for the senses and a triumph of storytelling. Jim Phoenix

  • Jenny Seagrove as Gertrude: Seagrove’s take on the Queen is interesting. I’ve seen Gertrude played a lot of different ways. Mostly, the audience should find some sympathy with Gertrude (enough to make a real connection that she truly loves Hamlet and is, most likely, innocent in most things). There are times where Seagrove approaches this, but the royal mask stays tightly on. Some have suggested her performance as ‘wooden’, but I think they are missing the point. Seagrove does move to emotion when she must, but the excels at keeping the ‘Royal Mask’ intact. In the end, Queen Gertrude is exactly that–Queen. When was the last time you saw England’s former monarch express a lot of emotion in public? This doesn’t suggest either were incapable of emotion, but rather a master of theirs.
  • Jonathan Hyde as Claudius and Emmanuella as Laertes: Hyde’s Claudius is the smooth villain you love to hate, capturing the complexity of the character with finesse. Cole steps into Laertes’ shoes and runs with them, delivering a performance that’s solid, given the big shoes she had to fill.

Mix in the age- and gender-blind casting, and you’ve got a recipe for a Hamlet that’s as fresh as it is classic. From modern-dress Polonius to a female Ghost stirring the pot, this cast turns Shakespeare on its head in the best way possible. And let’s not forget the costumes – or lack thereof, in terms of evocativeness. It’s like everyone decided to raid a very somber, very Shakespearean version of H&M. This works in the movie’s favor. It’s a zero-shits given version of Hamlet casting. They cast the best person for the role, gender, age, color be damned. It’s pretty refreshing to see this cast and they knock it out of the park.

Critical Reception and Audience Response

So, let’s dive into the sea of opinions swirling around this Hamlet film, shall we? I mean, it’s not every day you get to see Sir Ian McKellen give life to one of Shakespeare’s most tormented souls, right? The buzz was real, folks – from critics singing praises to some scratching their heads in puzzlement. Here’s the lowdown:

Let’s face it. Even my first thought was ‘how the hell is McKellen going to play Hamlet at 80??!’ Well, the answer is…brilliantly. Jim Phoenix

  • Praise for McKellen and the Modern Twist:
    • Critics and audiences were all about McKellen’s portrayal. The blend of youthful energy with the wisdom of age? Gorgeously done as we all knew he would.
    • The contemporary take on this classic tragedy had folks intrigued. It’s like Shakespeare met 2024 and they decided to throw a party.
  • But, Not All Was Rosy:
    • The relationship between Hamlet and Ophelia felt like it was on a diet – underdeveloped and leaving us wanting more. I’m not sure where it goes ‘wrong’ here. The acting is spectactular for both Hamlet and Ophelia, but there isn’t a joint spark. Hamlet’s kiss to his mother was more romantic than anything happening between these two (and that kiss was a tad creepy).
  • Production Woes and Wins:
    • Experimental space and tone had its ups and downs. Some decisions had us scratching our heads, wondering if the chaos was part of the charm. This includes some setting (how many flights of stairs did Gertrude run down to nark on her son?) and sometimes the lines either cut or–oddly–added.
    • With all that said, the good far outweigh the bad here. Even the wonky stair run works to show a level of Gertrude’s literal and metaphorical descent. It goes to show space in the madness–a madness that is quite contagious in this play.

Navigating through this mixed bag of reactions, it’s clear this Hamlet wasn’t just another adaptation. It was a conversation starter, a bold experiment in blending theatre with cinema, and a showcase for McKellen’s undiminished talent. As a Shakespeare enthusiast, it’s these daring takes that keep the bard’s work alive and kicking in our hearts.

For those new to Shakespeare…

I know someone who is currently teaching Hamlet in class. After seeing Sir Ian’s vision of Hamlet, we both agreed: This might be the bridge for younger adults to get a greater understanding of Shakespeare. The run time, the choice of words and scenery, and the stellar cast all form a ‘relatable’ version of Hamlet. There are some food for thought with this version that we discussed earlier (e.g., age and gender blind casting; some of the text is from elsewhere, etc), but if you’re new to Shakespeare and want to tip-toe in–this is your jam. Even better–if you love Hamlet and thought you saw it all–this is also your jam.

Conclusion

Through this detailed exploration of the Hamlet film starring Ian McKellen, we’ve navigated the complexities and novelties introduced by a profoundly compelling adaptation. The artistic innovation that underpins this rendition extends from its age-blind casting to the incorporation of modern dress, illustrating Shakespeare’s enduring relevance. McKellen’s portrayal of Hamlet, enriched by his depth of experience and fresh perspectives, alongside a robust supporting cast, fortifies the film’s appeal not only to Shakespeare veterans but also to those who are newly discovering the intricacies of the Bard’s masterpieces. This narrative fervor aligns harmoniously with an audience that is simultaneously well-versed in Shakespearean lore and eager to witness this unique adaptation unfold.

As I conclude, the significance of this adaptation transcends mere entertainment, heralding a vibrant dialogue between traditional theatre and contemporary cinema. The anticipation surrounding its release is a testament to the lasting impact of Shakespeare’s work, ingeniously reimagined for today’s audience. For enthusiasts and scholars alike, the film promises to be a captivating experience, merging the old with the new in a celebration of Shakespearean drama that is not to be missed.

To ensure you don’t miss out on this cinematic feat, make sure to go buy it from Kaleidoscope Home Entertainment when it comes out on Blu-ray, DVD, and streaming April 8. This adaptation not only redefines the parameters of classical theatre in the modern age but also beckons us to revisit the timeless questions and emotions that Shakespeare so masterfully encapsulated.

Final Rating

4.5 out of 5 stars (4.5 / 5)

Short Synopsis: McKellen reprises his lead role as Hamlet, a man who descends into madness as he seeks vengeance against his uncle for the alleged murder of his father. A tale of revenge that has stood the test of time, Shakespeare’s classic tragedy is reimagined for the modern day as a gripping psychological thriller. Kaleidoscope Home Entertainment

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movies n TV

Goosebumps, Night of the Living Dummy: Part 2

Published

on

After last episode’s spectacular ending that honestly felt like a season finale, I was apprehensive about this episode. I was expecting this one to feel slow, tacked on, and a little gimmicky. Fortunately, it was only two of those things.

The story

We begin our story with Nathan, just finishing up the book he’s written about Slappy and the town. He sent it off to a publisher who loves it! Except, for the ending.

Cover for Goosebums Night of the Living Dummy 2

Nathan tries valiantly to write an ending. But in the end, he just can’t come up with one. With his publisher breathing down his neck, Nathan decides the only way to end the book is to bring Slappy back for an encore.

Slappy manages to immediately endear himself to Nathan by bringing Fifi back to life. And I’ll be honest here. I probably wouldn’t have retrieved a homicidal dummy for the perfect ending to a book. But I’d do some shady shit for someone who could bring my dead pets back to life. Even if they did have scary monster teeth.

Advertisement

Of course, this sort of thing never goes to plan. Soon enough Slappy has everything he wants. And the ending of Nathan’s story is the least of his concerns.

Meanwhile, the teens are in Seattle with Margot and her mom. Margot is thinking about moving there, and there are conflicting opinions about this. Lucas realizes he never wants to leave their hometown, which causes conflict. Conflict that I didn’t think was bad enough that he needed to get on a bus and head home alone, but what do I know?

The only real reason why this matters is that the kids, who are clearly the only ones paying any attention in this town, are in fact out of town when Slappy returns.

What worked

A lot of the joy from this episode came from Nathan. It was a really fun episode if you are a fan of R.L. Stine, a fan of Stephen King, or a writer. As I’m all three, this was quite fun for me. At least half the episode was.

Advertisement

First, I loved the generational stupidity of Nathan Bratt. We know that it was his ancestor, Ephraim Biddle, who first found Slappy and locked him up in the Biddle house. It was then, of course, Harold Biddle who was corrupted and eventually killed by Slappy. So when Nathan goes to find Slappy, you can almost hear generations of his family yelling at him.

This episode is littered with jokes about R.L. Stein and Stephen King. King is name-dropped several times, and you can see at least one of his books in the background while Nathan’s talking to his publisher. Also, the publisher’s note that Nathan’s ending is bad could be a reference to King.

Stine also has a wonderful cameo in the form of a writing podcast Nathan is listening to. If that podcast exists, I need to find it. I also appreciated the dig about ‘everyone being dead the whole time’. This episode took shot after shot at my favorite childhood author and my favorite author from adulthood and I loved it.

Justin Long in Goosebumps.

What didn’t work

Sadly the episode couldn’t all be horror writing in-jokes. Sometimes we did have to pay attention to the main characters. And that storyline was, to put it bluntly, boring.

I couldn’t care less that Margot is considering moving. I don’t care that Isaiah and Lucas are both in love with her. I don’t care that Lucas has never heard of long-distance relationships. I don’t care that Isabella has feelings for Isaiah. I tuned into Goosebumps to watch killer dummies and vengeful ghosts. If I wanted to watch teenagers have hormones at each other, I’d have watched Degrassi. None of the teens’ love lives have anything to do with the plot and this portion of the show was so, so very dull.

Advertisement

All in all, this wasn’t the strongest episode of the season. It was one of those dreaded bridge episodes, there more to set the stage for what’s to come than to be enjoyable in its own right. But, it did that. I’m excited to see what the last episode has in store for us. 3.5 out of 5 stars (3.5 / 5)

If you’re a fan of my work, please check out my latest story, Nova, on Paper Beats World. New chapters launch every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending